[MD] still going?

[John Carl]

Heya Dan,

>>   I'm with you, dave.  I don't think you can  compare terms in differing
>> metaphysical contexts, quite so glibly.  Not without a lot of hemming and
>> hawing and opening up your baggage for inspection.
>
> Dan:
> But isn't that the fun? Examining that baggage someone's left open?
> Picking through it to see if there might be something of use? And I
> didn't take DiSanto's postulation as being offered glibly. I took the
> effort as worth our while to pursue.
>


JC:  You bet!  Examining our baggage is what the philosophical
endeavor is all about.  I've learned to my chagrin tho, that it's not
a game that every one wants to (or can) play.  But I agree with you,
let's pursue the idea.  Let's unpack its baggage.


> JC:
>> The subject-object
>> distinction itself is a kind of trap that Taoism avoids, so I don't see
>> how
>> you could relate Taoist terms to SOM's.    I also think Pirsig's use of
>> Quality as fundamental, is an improvement upon modern interpretations of
>> Taoism that assert "interaction between" yin and yang.
>
> Dan:
> Tao gives rise to the Two. The Two give rise to the Ten Thousand
> things, or words to that effect.


Jc:  Ok.  That seems  correct.  By "correct" I mean its a
comprehensive and self-consistent metaphysics that we can live with.


>It seems that the interaction between
> the Two is simply a way of organizing reality not dissimilar to
> subject and object. I took that as DiSanto's point. No?
>

JC:  I'll go along with you on what DiSanto's point is, I haven't
considered him in detail.  But no, or... yes... I'll have to parse
your assertion a bit more carefully... no.  Absolutely no.  Subject
and Object is a way of organizing reality wherein the subject is the
organizer and the objects are the reality.  That's nothing like yin
and yang.  Yin and Yang are aspects of mind/consciousness.  What
Objectivists would call "merely subjective".  So I don't see how you
can make these clothes fit.  Maybe we need to dig a bit deeper into
the luggage?


>>JC:
>> Interaction between.   That's a piss-poor term for caring, wouldn't you
>> say?
>
> Dan:
> That depends upon the context. Seems a kid as in a snot-nosed eighteen
> year old who worked as in formerly as a porter at the dealership where
> I do building maintenance just got canned for stealing change out of a
> customer's car. The kid. Said kid'd been there a while. Did quality
> work so far as it goes.

Sounds to me like he deserved the little tip.  as long as he stuck to
the small change.  I know that's not "moral", but it seems just to me.

> Leastways that's the word I got. Always helped
> when I asked for a hand. Can't say the same for most of the porters
> there. As in lazy assholes. The kid cared. But apparently his
> interaction between the tempation to pocket a bit of spare change vs
> his job seemed a bit convoluted. Did he care too much about the one
> and not the other? And where does the caring about one end and the
> other begin? Did he not realize quality and morality are synonymous?
> Or in his mind was one different from the other?
>


Bingo, Dan.  If you care about quality, you notice after a while that
there isn't much reward for it, on its own.  for instance, you'd think
a contractor like myself, would be rewarded for caring about the
quality of my work, the foundation and the framing, coming together in
perfect and cohesive lines and I'd be rewarded in the long run, even
if I didn't make as much profit from the job as flashier guys.
Well... that's not the way it works in actual life.  People are image
oriented and they go by appearances.  We live in the age of marketing
and the guy who puts caring about his work, over marketing his image,
will not prosper at all, except by the perceptions of good people who
look deeper than the image.  Those are rare these days.  So... I can
cut the kid some slack.  If he was a good worker, he should have been
taken aside and given a raise, along with an admonition to leave the
small change alone.


Sorry I've been so sporadic, Dan.  I've definitely been in slump-mode.
   I'm glad you're writing.  You're a good writer.  I wish I could
afford to send you a tip. :)

John